
Book ^AS. 



■ / 

SPEECH 



OF 






O 



MR. RHETT. OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 



ON THE 



OREGON QUESTION. 



Delivered i7i the House of Representatives , U. S., January 5^ 1846. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED BY J. AND G. S. GIDEON. 

1846. 



SPEECH. 



House of Representatives, January 5, 1846. — The House baring under consideration the 
joint resolution reported by the Committee on Foreign Aftairs, for giving the twelve months' 
notice to Great Britain of the termination of the Convention of 1827, respecting the joint oc- 
cupation of Oregon: Several members having addressed the House — 

Mr. RHETT obtained the floor, and spoke as follows : 
Mr. Speaker: The gentleman from Ohio who had just taken his seat, 
had stated, and stated truly, that the question before the House was, whether 
we should give Great Britain the notice required by the treaty of 1827, in 
order that the common occupancy it provides for, may be terminated; and 
had denounced all those who may be opposed to giving the notice, as doom- 
ed to the blackest infamy, and the curses of posterity . (Mr. McDowell rose 
and said, that he used those expressions towards those only who were op- 
posed to getting Oregon.) Nobody is opposed to getting Oregon; but I am 
glad, the gentleman has qualified his language; because otherwise, he would 
himself have fallen under his own deiumciations. I hold in my hand the 
journal of the last session of Congress, in which a vote on this very question 
of notice to Great Britain to terminate the convention of 1827, is recorded. 
A resolution had been offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Owen) 
for this purpose in the House. That resolution was referred to the Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs. The committee, aided by my vole as one of its 
members, reported against the resolution. The Conunittee on Territories 
subsequently reported a bill with respect to Oregon, but omitted in its de- 
ails the notice to Great Britain now so strenuously urged. Thus every 
committee of the last House of Representatives reported against this mea- 
.sure. How did it get into the bill? The gentleman from Massachusetts, 
over the way, (Mr. Adams,) suggested its insertion; and it was inserted in 
the bill from the Conmiittee on Territories, by a vote of 120 to 81. The 
majority of both the South and the West, voted against it. The gendeman 
from Illinois (Mr. Went worth,) the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Bow- 
LiN,) the gentleman from Obio (Mr. McDowell") and even you, Mr. Speak- 
er, joined with me in voting against it. And now -we are to hear homilies 



> 



concerning this measure, upon good faith, and (he Baltimore convention^ 
and Southern honor !! "Sir, I am precisely where I have ever been on thi& 
question. I opposed it, at the last Congress. 1 shall oppose it now, unless 
good reasons can be given to induce me to change my course. The change 
of others, operating perhaps to increase the fury of their zeal, can hardly be 
expected to carry conviction to any mind intent only on trutli or the true 
interests of the country. When the bill of the last year, finally passed ^ 
jTiany with myself voted for it witli great reluctance, although we were told^ 
that if the state of the negotiations then pending did not justify it, the 
notice would be easily stricken out in the Senate. The Senate justified 
our expectations on this point, although not in the precise mode we had 
expected ; and the notice was not given . 

I come, sir, to this question, again presented to the House — shall the no- 
tice be given for the termination of the joint occupancy with Great Britain of 
the Oregon territory? There is no other question in fact; for all the other 
measures recommended by the President in his message, with respect to the 
territory, will pass with scarcely a minorit)^ 

And the first position , I will take in the debate is this — those who are for 
changing the existing state of things — those who are for giving the notice and 
abrogating the convention of 1827, are bound to show, the propriety and pol- 
icy of the measure. For twenty years, the convention has continued under 
various administrations. If the policy of the past is to be changed, let the 
reasons be assigned. Declamation about the valor of the West, and the ra- 
pacity of Great Britain, however interesting, will not be sufiicien't to decide 
the question. In order that we may understand the effect of your policy,, 
we ask, what is your object in giving the notice ? Gentlemen all around 
me, give the same answer the President in hismessage shadows forth. Hesays, 
that '^before we can take exclusive jurisdiction of Oregon, the notice must 
be given; and he recommends accordingly , that it shall be given. Well, we 
give the notice, in order that we may proceed at the end of the year, to take 
^'exclusive jurisdiction " of Oregon. This is the object of the resolution be- 
fore the House. If we are told now, that we must go on to this measure, to> 
accomplish this object — how much stronger will be the argument to pride and 
consistency, to press it to its conclusion when once begun . Now, I ask, gen- 
tlemen, how can we take exclusive jurisdiction of Oregon without war? 
Must we not, to accomplish this object, at the end of twelve months, pull 
down the cross of St. George from over some thirty forts, and place the stripes 
and stars in its stead, and either drive every Briton out of the territory, or 
compel him to swear allegiance to our Government? Is this what gcndemen 



intend ? If not, the notice ought to be abandoned. But if this is what they 
propose to do, then it is war — plain, unequivocal war — war of our making, 
and in which we are to be the aggressors. Negotiation, we are told, has 
ceased on our part ; and it will hardly be supposed, under such circum- 
stances, that it will be further proposed by Great Britain. She will, most 
probably, after our notice, stand on the defensive. She will say, ''we shall 
not assail you ; but here we are, and we shall not move." We must move, 
if the policy proposed, is carried out. We must be the aggressors. We 
must turn Great Britain out of Oregon. 

Now in all contests between nations, involving the calamities of war, it is 
of the very last importance, to have the right. We should not only be satis- 
fied that we are right, but the cause of humanity and justice — -the great 
-cause of free government itself, involved in our destinies, demands, that the 
iiations of the civilized world, should perceive that we are right. Wrong, 
"violence and injustice, are the attributes of tyrannies. Peace and justice, are 
tiie foundations of all free governments. To move in accordance with our 
institutions, we must shew, in the clearest manner, that either our essential 
interests, or our vital liberties, require us to assail another nation, and, per- 
liaps, light up the whole of Christendom with the flames of war. 

Sir, I have listened with great attention, to learn, from gentlemen, what 
are the reasons that require us to change our position, under the Convention 
of 1827, and become the aggressors in this contest. Is the convention oper- 
ating to our disadvantage, more than it has done for the last twenty yeais? 
On the contrary, under the administration of General Jackson and Mr. Van 
Buren, it did operate greatly to our disadvantage. Great Britain, scattered 
over the country her trading posts and settlements. Yet, these administra- 
tions acquiesced in its operation. But within the last five years, things have 
changed. Our citizens have turned their faces to the Pacific; and many 
thousands have entered that territory. Daily the tidings arrive of new cohi- 
panies, taking up their march across the Rocky Mountains, by the peaceful 
instrumentality of emigration, to settle the ownership and destiny of that 
vast country. Thus, we endured the convention of 1S2T, whilst operating 
-against us; but now, when it is rapidly and surely securing to us the ascen- 
dancy in Oregon , and must give us its final mastery, its abrogation is furious- 
ly urged. If Great Britain should be dissatisfied with the present state of 
tilings, it would be natural enough. Gentlemen should remember, that 
the negotiations which have lately taken place, and that all negotiations 
that have heretofore taken place, have been at her instance. Why should 
we not rest under the Convention of 1827, with all the advantage^ it secures 



us; and compel her to move, or surrender the territory under its operation. 
Why should we not make her to be the aggressor— make her give us 
the notice, and expel us out of Oregon? In taking the contrary course, we 
are pursuing the very policy she desires, and are subserving her interests, 
not ours. 

One gentleman, and one only, has attempted to show, that the conven- 
tion of 1827 operated against us. The gentleman from Indiana, (Mr^ 
Owen,) whose accurate knowledge of this whole subject, and ability in en- 
forcing his opinions, entitle all that falls from him to great consideration, has 
stated, that the notice should be given, because our citizens are not allowed 
by the British, to settle on the north bank of the Columbia. But how are 
they prevented ? The gentleman has told us, in a very grieyous tale. One 
of our poor settlers lately pitched his cabin on the north side of the Colum- 
bia river; and forthwith received a bonus of eight hundred dollars to go over 
to the south side! And this is the enormous evil, under the great scarcity of 
land, which we must no longer endure, and which calls upon us as a na- 
tion, to put an end to the convention ! But the gentleman assigned another 
reason. The notice should be given, in order to prevent collision, because 
cur hardy emigrants ?f'ow/(/ go north of the Colunibia. How these two- 
reasons, can be consistent with each other, it ma}' not be easy to compre_ 
hend. We luust give the notice because our settlers cannot go north of 
the Columbia river; and then, we must give it, because they will. But the 
notice is, to prevent collision in Oregon!! How that will be, if we are to 
turn the British out of the territory, in consequence of it, it is hard to 
understand. If it does avoid collision in Oregon, will it not precipitate it 
over the whole world ? A general war with Great Britain, is his method 
of avoiding collision in Oregon! Such reasoning, surely, cannot be ne- 
cessary to a strong cause. 

But let us yield, that Ave have any advantages under the convention of 
1827. Suppose it operates to the benefit of Great Britain, instead of ours — 
how can abrogating the convention, in order that we may extend our " ex- 
clusive jurisdiction" over Oregon, gain us the territory? Can we take ex- 
clusive jurisdiction ? and if we can, is it worth the necessary cost? 

Sir, it is hardly worth while to mention Oregon in the war, if we are tO' 
have a war with Great Britain for it. If there is any fight there, it requires 
no great powers of prophesy to foretell, in the present state of things, with 
"whom will be the mastery. Great Britain, with her forts and military pre- 
parations, widi thousands of Indians under her control, is certainly most 
likely to prevail against our settlers, scattered and unarmed, without a can- 



non or a block house to defend them; and hundreds of miles of trackless 
mountains intervening, to prevent our aid. At least, she can maintain he 
position ; and prevent our conquest. If the people of Oregon, Biitish and 
American, however, act with wisdom, they will keep the peace with each 
other, and leave tlie two nations to fight out the war between themselves. 
After the first gun is fired, we will hear no more of Oregon on this side of 
the Rocky Mountain^. Our people, will have quite fighting enough to em- 
ploy them nearer home, involving far nearer and dearer interests. The 
taking or re-taking of Canada, Nova Scotia, or New Brunswick — the mari- 
time supremacy of the seas — our ravaged coasts or burning cities, will de- 
mand all*the energies rage, ambition, and lust can give to war. As the 
Duke of Wellington once said in the British Parliament, a war with the 
United States, can be no "little war." The ftxct, that it shall have arisen 
for such a cause as Oregon, so fairly liable to adjustment, if tliere was any 
disposition for peace , will be an infallible indication , of the extremities to which 
it must go. It must be common to every sea and continent; and convulse, 
perhaps involve, the whole civilized world in its fearful ravages. How can 
Oregon be gained by such a war? In but one way. We must be success- 
ful, and overthrow the mighty fabric of the British empire. We cannot 
gain it by a drawn fight, after mutual injuries, like our last war, concluded 
without the original cause of its existence , being even mentioned in the terms of 
peace. The nature of the object contended for, w41L not admit of this. The 
spirit which creates the contest will not tolerate it. We must, in language 
used in the other end of the Capitol, be able "to dictate our terms at the 
cannon's mouth." The mightiest nation since the days of Rome, must be 
vanquished by our arms; and her pride and her glory, be torn from her for- 
ever. She is of the same great race with ourselves; and it would be dis- 
paraging our proud ancestry to suppose, that any other than a long, ex- 
hausting, and terrific struggle, can accomplish her downfall. 

Sir, I ask gentlemen, with the most extravagant estimate of our re- 
sources, are they sure that we are adequate to such an enterprise , and can thus 
obtain Oregon? They ought to be sure, for the sacrifices are too mighty 
to be risked on hazards. It may be, as the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Owen) intimated, that we may be compelled to meet Great Britain in arms, 
and dispute her ascendancy hi the world. History has shown that nations, 
when great, will aim at supremacy; and, from being rivals, soon look upon 
each other as enemies. Carthage and Rome in ancient times; and Great 
Britain and France for many centuries past, elucidate this tendency in na- 
tions. Despite the strong ties of origin and interests, we maybe compelled, 



8 

from the same causes, to meet Great Britain in a mortal struggle, in whicli 
one or the other people must be overthrown. But the gentleman's policy, 
in precipitating a contest now concerning Oregon, is utterly at variance with 
such anticipations. If such a contest is to arise, is it our policy to make or 
hasten it? Time can win us Oregon. Time can place us above such a 
struggle, or give us power successfully to meet it. Look at our progress to 
greatness and power. Already, in fifty years, upwards of twenty millions 
of people, daily increasing beyond all parallel, with a commerce, binding to 
us, in the golden chains of interest, every nation in every clime. We are 
gaining, and Great Britain, is relatively losing power every day, both in Or- 
egon and throughout the world. Why should we intenuptour cytain and. 
inevitable destiny to supremacy amongst the nations of the earth, by a pre- 
mature contest, if called for by neither interest nor honor ? If Great Britain 
should believe gentlemen's speculations to be true, she, indeed, might urge 
on the contest; or, Avhat for her would be far better, leave it to those who 
are here pressing matters to an issue with her, to work out her policy. But 
this is not the course which American interests require. Give us fifty j thirty, 
twenty years — and we can defy Great Britain or the world. 

But we are not to have the war with Great Britain alone, if the nature of 
the struggle shall be such as gentlemen have vauntingly and defyingly 
maintained. They say, that it will be a waV between systems of govern- 
ment — between monarchy and republicanism — between despotic and free 
governments. Now, that Great Britain should endeavor to give this aspect to 
any war she may have with us, for any cause, is natural enough. If she can 
succeed in making the crowned heads of Europe believe, that the spirit of 
Revolutionary France is abroad in the United States; and that we have seized 
the sword, to upturn their thrones, and force liberty throughout the world, 
she will not lack allies in her cause. Our fate — the fate of republican gov- 
ernment, entrusted to our care and maintenance, will be sealed. Great as 
we may be, it will hardlv be maintained, that we can vanquish all Christen- 
dom combined against us. Sir, again I ask the question, if this is to be the 
contest, what can we gain by precipitating it ? Should we not wait — wait 
until we gather the strength, which time is certainly and inevitably bringing 
to our aid ? Wait until we are assailed — and then, wait still longer if we 
can , whilst we make preparations better to fight for liberty and life. If 
Oregon is to involve us in a contest, in which our very existence is to be 
staked, let us understand the issue. We are to get Oregon, by vanquishing 
the world ! ! 

But adn)it tliaf, we succeed— we overthrow the British empire — plant our 



eagle on the palace of St. James— force free governments over every throne 
in Europe; and Oregon — the whole of Oregon, is ours. What then? We 
must be ruined ourselves. Suppose the Union and our form of free gov- 
ernment survives the contest, can any gentleman beheve that, in reality, 
our Government will be the same at its termination , as at its commencement? 
I am one of those who believe, that all the liberty our Constitution confers, 
exists in its limitations. Take away its limitations — its admirable partition 
of powers between the States and the federal head, by which the different; 
sections of the Union can protect their peculiar interests, and it erects over 
us, one of the most odious despotisms the world has ever seen. Sir, all my 
life, and here for nine years, I have been striving to enforce these limita- 
tions, into the practice of the Government. The tendency of the system, is 
to centralization , as its general operation clearly proves. Nothing but a 
calm reasoning intelligence, can be able to arrest this tendency, and secure 
to the States the rightful powers belonging to them; and thus secure liberty 
and safety to the citizens in all parts of the Union . S uch a state of the popular 
mind, cannot exist in war. All wars are adverse to liberty. They produce 
violence, not virtuous restraint. They appeal to force, and not to reason. 
But with our system of government, we must strengthen , by employing alone 
in war, the powers of the General Government. The limitations of the Con- 
stitu ion will be subverted, if in the least in the way of the efficient prosecution 
of hostilities; whilst all opposition to save the system , by insisting on its limita- 
tions, will be considered as unpatriotic or treacherous. Nor are these infer- 
ences, mere speculations. . The only wars we have ever had, althougli far 
siiorter than can be anticipated from the struggle we have now proposed to us, 
ended in enforcing Federalism in the system. After our Revolutionary war, 
the first movements of our form of government, under the military influ- 
ences of our Revolution, were to Federalism. Again, after our last war, 
although originating with the Republican or Democratic party, and support- 
ed by them — all their principles were subverted, under the influences it left 
behind it. The paper system it engendered — its banks — its debts — its tariffs 
— its internal improvements, although partially overthrown, still form the 
points of controversy between the two gieat parties of the country. It has 
required thirty years of peace and discussion, to rid, even partially, the 
Constitution of its corrupt and centralizing influences. Who will look 
for any reform of the taxing power, or your vicious system of expendi- 
tures, after such a war as gentlemen propose? All the limitations of the 
Constitution, from long desuetude, will be obsolete ; and your Presi- 
dent^ re-elected at his volition, will be the monarch of a despotism. If 



the Constitution and liberty itself will be thus endangered ; does it not 
become gentlemen, to show clearly the necessity of any measure which 
may lead to such disasters ? If war wins the wealth and empire of the 
world, it would be loo dear at such a cost. But war, is waste and poverty. 
It is crime, enormous crime — generally of all parties concerned, but always 
of one; and as they have been usually conducted, they are unmitigated 
evils, and the fiercest'scourges of God. The only wars which can be justi- 
fiable, and under which a free government can endure, are wars of de- 
fence — ^wars to prevent tyranny and wrong. Such were Ihc only two warS; 
in which we have been engaged, since we have been a people. In such a 
war, I know we are unconquerable; and I neither fear Great Britain nor any 
other nation whom the lust of conquest may bring against us. But it is 
another thing, when we are to become the assailants, and conquer others., 
They may be, acting on the defensive, as unconquerable as we are; nor 
can we be conquorers of others, without being conquorers of ourselves. Is 
it such a war, in which gentlemen propose, we shall now engage? No, sir. 
We are to be the assailants — conquer Great Britain — overthrow monarchy 
in the world, and wind up, by re-establishing it, over the ruins of American 
liberty and the Constitution of the United States. And this is the way to 
get Oregon ! ! Sir, I am for getting Oregon; but, according to my humble 
apprehension, this is plainly a very had way of losing Oregon. Gentlemen 
are furious in denouncing Great Britain, but they may be assured, if they 
do not know it, that they are her very best friends, pursuing such a policy. 

But we are told our honor requires us to give Ijlie notice proposed, and to 
move on to the possession of Oregon, reckless of consequences. We are all 
of us, I believe, for moving on — certainly as far as Great Britain has gone. 
But this is mere matter of policy. What has our honor to do with this ques- 
tion in any form ? Does any one alledge that Great Britain has violated the 
convention of 1827, and, therefore, it should be annulled? There is no 
such allegation . Is our honor tarnished , by its existence ? Then Great 
Britain, the other party to it, is also dishonored; and all the great statesmen 
preceding us since ISIS, who originated and have continued this conven- 
tion, have had unmerited reputations. What has Great Britain done or 
said; to touch our honor? I have heard of nothing, but the tone of the ne- 
gotiation. I have read over the correspondence between the negotiators, 
and can see nothing in it that the most delicate sensibility to insiilt or wrong 
amongst gentlemen, could be offended at. But if it had been far other- 
wise — is the honor of a great nation, to take fire at the good or bad manners 
Or style of their agents? The honor of a country, in a free government, 



11 

is not the property of the punctilious few ^or of one man , but of the people ; and 
can scarcely be separated, from its' essential interests. It will not only be 
jealous , but just ; and can never disregard the great object of all association in 
government — protection to property, liberty , and life . Remember, what our 
ancestors endured in our Revolution, and still more signally, in 1812, from 
this very nation, before they appealed to arms. If I had heard from the 
South, this extraordinary enunciation of our honor being implicated in the 
measure proposed, I could, in some measure, comprehend it. Our last war^ 
which they forced on, was with them, a war for honor, and nothing else. 
But to hear it from the North, and the Northwest, where the word is 
scouted as equivalent to murder, is very surprising. Here are gentlemen, 
who would hang as a felon any Southern gentleman , who should appeal to 
the duel to redress an insult; and yet, for no insult at all — for no wrong, or 
alleged wrong — the}^ would phmge two of the greatest nations in the world 
into war, ^-to maintain the nation's honor I" They act, I suppose, on the 
principle, that ''one murder makes a villain — millions a hero." Sir, I 
am no advocate for private war; but I am at a loss to understand, how gen- 
tlemen can so recklessly mge on and defend a great public war, and yet 
condemn private war. If insult, cannot justify violence in the individual, 
neither can it justify it in a nation composed of its individuals. Matters 
seem to be strangely reversed. It is the South now, that is dead to national 
honor ! The North — the religious and moral North — in its fiery impatience 
at even imaginary wrong, is for rushing into war; and, with its panting 
chivalry, taunts the tame reluctance of the South to vindicate "the honor of 
the country!" Sir, I have no imputations to make against the North or 
West, in this fury for strife and carnage; but I hope, I may be pardoned at 
least for saying, that the South needs no defender here against charges, ex- 
press or implied, of indifference to the honor of the Union, or of readiiiess 
to maintain it. Whilst history exists, she needs no other vindicator. But 
she will not, without cause, take offence when none is intended; nor rush 
into a war, when it cannot be shown, that either the interest or honor of the 
Union, requires its stern alternative. But if, against her judgment and will ;r 
she is overruled in the common council, to which, by the Constitution, all 
such matters are entrusted, she will abide the issue. As heretofore, she 
will take her part in the struggle; and where the battle is hottest and 
thickest, there she will be found. 

Mr. Speaker, I regretted to hear a colloquy which passed yesterda)'' be- 
tween the gentleman from New York, (Mr. King,) and the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mv. DorcLASs.) It seems, that the gentleman from Illinois 



12 

had said, that a game was being played, to defeat action on the subject of 
Oregon in this House ; and the gentleman from New York , by way of tel- 
ling the House, what that game was, pulled out of his desk the Times, 
newspaper, of London, and read an extract, in which it was anticipated, from 
the most manifest causes of interest, that the south and the east would be 
opposed to immediate and extreme measures. The gentleman had men- 
tioned but one name— (Mr. Calhoun) — but that was a talisman quite suf- 
ficient to operi his designs. As the gentleman is so ready to charge games 
on others, who may oppose the measme before the House, I suppose he 
cannot object to hear, what others say of his game in supporting it. Well, 
then, it is said that the gendeman a'nd his northern friends, are engaged in 
the interesting game of overthrowing, in the Democratic party, that south- 
ern portion of it, which is supposed to have overthrown, ni the late presi- 
<lential election, the pretensions of New York to the Presidency. By the 
use of the Texas question, the West and the South were united, and the 
North was placed in a minority, and her leading statesman put aside for the 
Presidency. The gentleman and his friends, under the highest sense of 
patriotism, now propose, to unite the West and the North by the question of 
Oregon, and thus destroy the ascendancy of the South ; well knowing, that 
her leading statesmen, will not sacrifice the interests of that great region, for 
party power or personal aggrandizement. Hence his burning zeal for the 
wliole'of Oregon ; and the weak but poisoned shafts, he aims against the 
great statesman of the South. The gentleman from Illinois, (Mr. Doug- 
lass,) also, is supposed to be in a game equally interesting. The West is 
to make the next President; and, for this purpose, nothing is so well adapt- 
ed, as to unite the whole West on some great Western measure. The 
question of Oregon, by appealing at once to their hatred of Great Britain, 
the lust of dominion, and the supposed interests of the Union, will sweep 
over the country like a whirlwind, lifting up those who uphold, and over- 
throwing all who oppose it. Thus, are the property and blood of the 
people of the United States, to be staked, in this mighty and profligate gam- 
being for power and place. In this game, are also joined many who oppose 
all reform in this Government, especially on the Tariff. They remember 
the policy of ihe Roman aristocracy, in getting up foreign wars, whenever 
the people sought to reform the corruptions and abuses they had spread 
over the State. To these, are added, all who hate the South and their in- 
stitutions, like the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Adams,) and the 
gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. Giddings.) When such evil birds are on the 
wing, we know the prey they seek. Tlie South is to be desolated, by" 



14 

invasion from abroad, and insurrection within. The North, is to be 
strengthened, by the addition of the British possessions north of our 
Union; and the South, and all Southern reforms, be forever buried 
beneath the fury of the storm such master spirits shall raise and con- 
trol. Sir, I listened with great attention to the plea of the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. McDoweli.) for changing his course on this ques- 
tion. With me, he was formerly opposed to this notice; but he changes 
his course now, because it is the will of his constituents. Whilst changing 
his, he will not deny to other gentlemen the duty of adhering to their 
position, from the same controlling cause. T can see nothing but dis- 
aster to my constituents, from the war his policy proposes. His constituents, 
have scarcely anything to e:^port to foreign nations. Nearly all that my 
constituents produce, is dependent on foreign nations for consumption, espe- 
cially on that nation, with whom it is proposed to war. His constituents, 
will be far away from the contest — mine must meet it, face to face. His 
people, will have a market for their grain, in the armies which must mus- 
ter and tight on our Northern line — mine, must see their produce rot in their 
barns, or be piled up in their fields, or be consumed by the enemy. These 
evils, or evils a thousand times worse , are no causes for not entering into a just 
war, to maintain the honor or rights of the Union; but they are sufficient, to 
make them demand, to make me demand, in their name, that you show, 
clearly and distinctly, that duty and patriotism require the sacrifice; and 
that, all other measures for peace being exhausted, we have no other alterna- 
tive than the sword, to restore the outraged honor and violated rights of the 
country. Independently of interest, every principle of justice, humanity, 
and Christianity, requires that this shall be done. Let our consciences be 
clear of unnecessary blood ; and, like our fathers, we be able, with confi- 
dence, to appeal to the Great Arbiter of the fate of nations for his approba- 
tion and support. Then victory, may not be ruin; and e\»en defeat, be success; 
and military conquest, which has overthrown every other republic which has 
entered on its devastating career, may at least not leave us slaves. I do not 
beheve, negotiation to be exhausted. I do not believe war to be inevitable; 
and I am, therefore, for leaving in those hands, to which the Constitution 
has entrusted them, the conduct, as well as the responsibility, of all mea- 
sures which, in the present state of things, affect the question of peace or 
war. The Executive, I trust, in the estimation of gentlemen, is competent 
to this high duty; and whilst maintaining peace, will vindicate the honor 
and rights of the Union . 



^^BMt'20 



